Search

Purpose: Epidemiological and logistical reasons are slowing the clinical validation of the molecular imaging biomarkers in the initial stages of neurocognitive disorders. We provide an updated systematic review of the recent advances (2017-2022), highlighting methodological shortcomings., Methods: Studies reporting the diagnostic accuracy values of the molecular imaging techniques (i.e., amyloid-, tau-, [18F]FDG-PETs, DaT-SPECT, and cardiac [123I]-MIBG scintigraphy) in predicting progression from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to dementia were selected according to the Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) method and evaluated with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Main eligibility criteria were as follows: (1) ≥ 50 subjects with MCI, (2) follow-up ≥ 3 years, (3) gold standard: progression to dementia or diagnosis on pathology, and (4) measures of prospective accuracy., Results: Sensitivity (SE) and specificity (SP) in predicting progression to dementia, mainly to Alzheimer's dementia were 43-100% and 63-94% for [ 18 F]FDG-PET and 64-94% and 48-93% for amyloid-PET. Longitudinal studies were lacking for less common disorders (Dementia with Lewy bodies-DLB and Frontotemporal lobe degeneration-FTLD) and for tau-PET, DaT-SPECT, and [123I]-MIBG scintigraphy. Therefore, the accuracy values from cross-sectional studies in a smaller sample of subjects (n > 20, also including mild dementia stage) were chosen as surrogate outcomes. DaT-SPECT showed 47-100% SE and 71-100% SP in differentiating Lewy body disease (LBD) from non-LBD conditions; tau-PET: 88% SE and 100% SP in differentiating DLB from Posterior Cortical Atrophy. [ 123 I]-MIBG scintigraphy differentiated LBD from non-LBD conditions with 47-100% SE and 71-100% SP., Conclusion: Molecular imaging has a moderate-to-good accuracy in predicting the progression of MCI to Alzheimer's dementia. Longitudinal studies are sparse in non-AD conditions, requiring additional efforts in these settings., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Aim: To evaluate the incremental value of FDG-PET over clinical tests in: (i) diagnosis of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS); (ii) picking early signs of neurodegeneration in patients with a genetic risk of Huntington's disease (HD); and detecting metabolic changes related to cognitive impairment in (iii) ALS and (iv) HD patients., Methods: Four comprehensive literature searches were conducted using the PICO model to extract evidence from relevant studies. An expert panel then voted using the Delphi method on these four diagnostic scenarios., Results: The availability of evidence was good for FDG-PET utility to support the diagnosis of ALS, poor for identifying presymptomatic subjects carrying HD mutation who will convert to HD, and lacking for identifying cognitive-related metabolic changes in both ALS and HD. After the Delphi consensual procedure, the panel did not support the clinical use of FDG-PET for any of the four scenarios., Conclusion: Relative to other neurodegenerative diseases, the clinical use of FDG-PET in ALS and HD is still in its infancy. Once validated by disease-control studies, FDG-PET might represent a potentially useful biomarker for ALS diagnosis. FDG-PET is presently not justified as a routine investigation to predict conversion to HD, nor to detect evidence of brain dysfunction justifying cognitive decline in ALS and HD.

Background: FDG-PET is frequently used as a marker of synaptic damage to diagnose dementing neurodegenerative disorders. We aimed to adapt the items of evidence quality to FDG-PET diagnostic studies, and assess the evidence available in current literature to assist Delphi decisions for European recommendations for clinical use., Methods: Based on acknowledged methodological guidance, we defined the domains, specific to FDG-PET, required to assess the quality of evidence in 21 literature searches addressing as many Population Intervention Comparison Outcome (PICO) questions. We ranked findings for each PICO and fed experts making Delphi decisions for recommending clinical use., Results: Among the 1435 retrieved studies, most lacked validated measures of test performance, an adequate gold standard, and head-to-head comparison of FDG-PET and clinical diagnosis, and only 58 entered detailed assessment. Only two studies assessed the accuracy of the comparator (clinical diagnosis) versus any kind of gold-/reference-standard. As to the index-test (FDG-PET-based diagnosis), an independent gold-standard was available in 24% of the examined papers; 38% used an acceptable reference-standard (clinical follow-up); and 38% compared FDG-PET-based diagnosis only to baseline clinical diagnosis. These methodological limitations did not allow for deriving recommendations from evidence., Discussion: An incremental diagnostic value of FDG-PET versus clinical diagnosis or lack thereof cannot be derived from the current literature. Many of the observed limitations may easily be overcome, and we outlined them as research priorities to improve the quality of current evidence. Such improvement is necessary to outline evidence-based guidelines. The available data were anyway provided to expert clinicians who defined interim recommendations.

Purpose: To assess the clinical utility of 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) for detection of early signs of neurodegeneration in conditions of increased risk for Alzheimer's disease (AD) as defined by: subjective cognitive decline (SCD), evidence of cerebral amyloid-pathology, apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4-positive genotype, or autosomal dominant forms of AD (ADAD) in asymptomatic stages., Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using the PICO model to extract evidence from relevant studies. An expert panel then voted using the Delphi method on three different diagnostic scenarios., Results: The level of empirical study evidence for the use of FDG-PET to detect meaningful early signs of neurodegeneration was considered to be poor for ADAD and lacking for SCD and asymptomatic persons at risk, based on APOE ε4-positive genotype or cerebral amyloid pathology. Consequently, and consistent with current diagnostic criteria, panelists decided not to recommend routine clinical use of FDG-PET in these situations and to currently mainly reserve it for research purposes., Conclusion: Currently, there is limited evidence on which to base recommendations regarding the clinical routine use of FDG-PET to detect diagnostically meaningful early signs of neurodegeneration in asymptomatic subjects with ADAD, with APOE ε4-positive genotype, or with cerebral amyloid pathology, and in subjects with SCD. Future prospective studies are warranted and in part already ongoing, aiming to assess the added value of FDG-PET in this context beyond research applications.

Purpose: We aim to report the quality of accuracy studies investigating the utility of [ 18 F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-PET in supporting the diagnosis of prodromal Alzheimer's Disease (AD), frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) and prodromal dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) subjects, and the corresponding recommendations made by a panel of experts., Methods: Seven panellist, four from the European Association of Nuclear Medicine, and three from the European Academy of Neurology, produced recommendations taking into consideration the incremental value of FDG-PET, as added on clinical-neuropsychological examination, to ascertain the aetiology of MCI (AD, FTLD or DLB). A literature search using harmonized population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) strings was performed, and an evidence assessment consistent with the European Federation of Neurological Societies guidance was provided. The consensual recommendation was achieved based on Delphi rounds., Results: Fifty-four papers reported the comparison of interest. The selected papers allowed the identification of FDG patterns that characterized MCI due to AD, FTLD and DLB. While clinical outcome studies supporting the diagnosis of MCI due to AD showed varying accuracies (ranging from 58 to 100%) and varying areas under the receiver-operator characteristic curves (0.66 to 0.97), no respective data were identified for MCI due to FTLD or for MCI due to DLB. However, the high negative predictive value of FDG-PET and the existence of different disease-specific patterns of hypometabolism support the consensus recommendations for the clinical use of this imaging technique in MCI subjects., Conclusions: FDG-PET has clinical utility on a fair level of evidence in detecting MCI due to AD. Although promising also in detecting MCI due to FTLD and MCI due to DLB, more research is needed to ultimately judge the clinical utility of FDG-PET in these entities.

Aim: To assess the clinical utility of FDG-PET as a diagnostic aid for differentiating Alzheimer's disease (AD; both typical and atypical forms), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD), vascular dementia (VaD) and non-degenerative pseudodementia., Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using the PICO model to extract evidence from relevant studies. An expert panel then voted on six different diagnostic scenarios using the Delphi method., Results: The level of empirical study evidence for the use of FDG-PET was considered good for the discrimination of DLB and AD; fair for discriminating FTLD from AD; poor for atypical AD; and lacking for discriminating DLB from FTLD, AD from VaD, and for pseudodementia. Delphi voting led to consensus in all scenarios within two iterations. Panellists supported the use of FDG-PET for all PICOs-including those where study evidence was poor or lacking-based on its negative predictive value and on the assistance it provides when typical patterns of hypometabolism for a given diagnosis are observed., Conclusion: Although there is an overall lack of evidence on which to base strong recommendations, it was generally concluded that FDG-PET has a diagnostic role in all scenarios. Prospective studies targeting diagnostically uncertain patients for assessing the added value of FDG-PET would be highly desirable.

Purpose: A joint effort of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) and the European Academy of Neurology (EAN) aims at clinical guidance for the use of FDG-PET in neurodegenerative diseases. This paper addresses the diagnostic utility of FDG-PET over clinical/neuropsychological assessment in the differentiation of the three forms of primary progressive aphasia (PPA)., Methods: Seven panelists were appointed by the EANM and EAN and a literature search was performed by using harmonized PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) question keywords. The studies were screened for eligibility, and data extracted to assess their methodological quality. Critical outcomes were accuracy indices in differentiating different PPA clinical forms. Subsequently Delphi rounds were held with the extracted data and quality assessment to reach a consensus based on both literature and expert opinion., Results: Critical outcomes for this PICO were available in four of the examined papers. The level of formal evidence supporting clinical utility of FDG-PET in differentiating among PPA variants was considered as poor. However, the consensual recommendation was defined on Delphi round I, with six out of seven panelists supporting clinical use., Conclusions: Quantitative evidence demonstrating utility or lack thereof is still missing. Panelists decided consistently to provide interim support for clinical use based on the fact that a typical atrophy or metabolic pattern is needed for PPA according to the diagnostic criteria, and the synaptic failure detected by FDG-PET is an earlier phenomenon than atrophy. Also, a normal FDG-PET points to a non-neurodegenerative cause.

Purpose: To review literature until November 2015 and reach a consensus on whether automatic semi-quantification of brain FDG-PET is useful in the clinical setting for neurodegenerative disorders., Methods: A literature search was conducted in Medline, Embase, and Google Scholar. Papers were selected with a lower limit of 30 patients (no limits with autopsy confirmation). Consensus recommendations were developed through a Delphi procedure, based on the expertise of panelists, who were also informed about the availability and quality of evidence, assessed by an independent methodology team., Results: Critical outcomes were available in nine among the 17 papers initially selected. Only three papers performed a direct comparison between visual and automated assessment and quantified the incremental value provided by the latter. Sensitivity between visual and automatic analysis is similar but automatic assessment generally improves specificity and marginally accuracy. Also, automated assessment increases diagnostic confidence. As expected, performance of visual analysis is reported to depend on the expertise of readers., Conclusions: Tools for semi-quantitative evaluation are recommended to assist the nuclear medicine physician in reporting brain FDG-PET pattern in neurodegenerative conditions. However, heterogeneity, complexity, and drawbacks of these tools should be known by users to avoid misinterpretation. Head-to-head comparisons and an effort to harmonize procedures are encouraged.

Purpose: There are no comprehensive guidelines for the use of FDG PET in the following three clinical scenarios: (1) diagnostic work-up of patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease (PD) at risk of future cognitive decline, (2) discriminating idiopathic PD from progressive supranuclear palsy, and (3) identifying the underlying neuropathology in corticobasal syndrome., Methods: We therefore performed three literature searches and evaluated the selected studies for quality of design, risk of bias, inconsistency, imprecision, indirectness and effect size. Critical outcomes were the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive/negative predictive value, area under the receiving operating characteristic curve, and positive/negative likelihood ratio of FDG PET in detecting the target condition. Using the Delphi method, a panel of seven experts voted for or against the use of FDG PET based on published evidence and expert opinion., Results: Of 91 studies selected from the three literature searches, only four included an adequate quantitative assessment of the performance of FDG PET. The majority of studies lacked robust methodology due to lack of critical outcomes, inadequate gold standard and no head-to-head comparison with an appropriate reference standard. The panel recommended the use of FDG PET for all three clinical scenarios based on nonquantitative evidence of clinical utility., Conclusion: Despite widespread use of FDG PET in clinical practice and extensive research, there is still very limited good quality evidence for the use of FDG PET. However, in the opinion of the majority of the panellists, FDG PET is a clinically useful imaging biomarker for idiopathic PD and atypical parkinsonism associated with dementia.